135L, 100L macro and Sigma 150 macro

I had the chance to do a quick comparison of these three lenses today on my new 5DII. I have to say I was
very
impressed with the 100L macro I have on loan (I own the other 2). I believe it to be as sharp at f2.8 as my 135L and it has the latest generation IS as well. The 150 Sigma is also exceedingly sharp, but unfortunately I can't get enough micro-adjustment on the 5DII to get the focus spot on at f2.8. I have it set at the maximum +20 and it still needs about 5 more to get it just right. The 135L is a little softer at f2 than it (or the 100L) is at f2.8, but still very good.

The background blur from the 100L is very smooth - though perhaps not quite as good as the 135L. In macro lenses I have had the 90 Tamron (very sharp), the Canon 180L ( extremely good, but a bit too big/heavy for hand-holding in the bush), the Canon 100 ( quite good, but didn't impress me greatly), the Sigma 150 ( which is very sharp and a good size/focal length for hand-holding) and the Canon MPE-65 (probably he sharpest of the lot, but for specialist applications only).

I think the 100L may be my new favourite and I can see another hit to the bank balance (to go with the upgrades 5D - 5DII and 1DIII - 1DIV this week).

In fact the 135L mightn't get a lot of use if I buy the 100L.
--

Judge: ' This image may be better in black and white - perhaps even just black! '